Ex Parte Turner et al - Page 13


              Appeal No. 2004-1040                                                        Page 13                        
              Application No. 09/770,643                                                                                 

                     Subsequent references (GenBank NM_130773 and AB077881) by others                                    
                     do teach proteins which are 99% identical to that of the claimed invention.                         
                     These proteins are named “Caspr” proteins and are members of the                                    
                     neurexin superfamily. . . .  While it is known, as Applicants disclose in the                       
                     specification, that the superfamily of neurexins mediate neuronal processes,                        
                     the specific neur[on]al processes of the proteins and genes of the present                          
                     invention have not been disclosed. . . .  Therefore, one of ordinary skill in                       
                     the art would not know how to use a protein, or a gene, which is only known                         
                     to generally be involved in neuronal processes, along with potentially                              
                     hundreds or thousands of proteins.                                                                  
                     Appellants argue that the claimed nucleic acids encode a protein that would be                      
              accepted as a caspr by those skilled in the art, because                                                   
                     two sequences sharing nearly 100% percent identity at the protein level                             
                     over the entire length of the claimed sequence are present in the leading                           
                     scientific repository for biological sequence data (GenBank), and have                              
                     been annotated by third party scientists wholly unaffiliated with Appellants                        
                     as “Homo sapiens caspr5 protein.” . . .  Given these GenBank                                        
                     annotations, there can be no question that those skilled in the art would                           
                     clearly believe that Appellants’ sequence is a caspr protein.                                       
              Appeal Brief, pages 4-5.  Appellants cite sequence comparison data that purportedly                        
              show that “caspr proteins are distinct members of the neurexin superfamily,” id., page 5,                  
              and conclude that, “[a]s the Examiner admits that casprs have a specific utility, due to                   
              their association with ‘myelinated axons and potassium channels’ (the Final Action at                      
              page 3), the claimed sequence clearly meets the requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 101.”  Id.,                    
              page 6.                                                                                                    
                     We do not agree that the characterization of the claimed nucleic acids as                           
              encoding a contactin-associated protein (caspr) is sufficient to establish their utility.  The             
              specification admits that “[n]eurexins have been associated with, inter alia, mediating                    
              neural processes, seizures, signaling, exocytosis, cancer, and development.  Neurexins                     
              can also serve as receptors for latrotoxins.”  Page 1.  The specification does not                         






Page:  Previous  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  Next 

Last modified: November 3, 2007